Secret stockpile?...Not likely.

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Apparently you failed to see the irony in these stories coming hard on the heels of his of his criticism of Dubbyuh and his merry band of neocon chicken-hawks. Just another inempt attempt by the administration to discredit the messenger.

How stupid. Nobody cared about this dude before he started spewing forth his BS so of course none of this came out before hand. But it was well documented before hand.....

You are an idiot!

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
As was mentioned earlier, you cannot address the issue, so like any good Nazi...er...Bush supporter, you attack the source.

Well you certainly nullified yourself with that post, Bully. You disagree with someone questioning of your source yet at the same time call them a Nazi because they support Bush.

 

[Gop guy]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
If you think this is a righteous war, then your education and reasoning skills are in serious need of improvement.

Why yes Bully, I do believe you don't like this country and hate it's efforts to free people from tyranical regimes.

 

[4USA]

How do the Saddam apologists explain those lethal chemical weapons that were sent into Jordan from Syria (another Baathist regime that Saddam no doubt used as one of his hiding places for his WMD)? That happened a few weeks ago and fortunately was intercepted before 80000 innocent people could have been killed. Zarqawi - whom Saddam sheltered in Baghdad after Zarqawi's Afghanistan sanctuary disappeared and then set up training camps in Northern Iraq- was reportedly involved in this terrorist plot.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Gop guy
Why yes Bully, I do believe you don't like this country and hate it's efforts to free people from tyranical regimes.

Then America needs to free other nations from their tyrannical regimes...You know, like Sudan and Myanmar, and North Korea, and others. But you know what?...THere's no oil there.

As to your other criticism...I love America but I find it's current crop of "leaders" to be corrupt and incompetent beyond belief. Do not confuse loathing for this administration with loathing of America. I took an oath, the same oath that Dubbyuh and his neocon cronies took, to support and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. Something which Dubbyuh and his merry band seem to have chucked out the window with the bathwater.

 

[Gop guy]

Who's to say we won't do that?

Also, ammending our constitution is now clearly the ONLY way to defend the American people from radical left judges who want to push their views on us all.

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Then America needs to free other nations from their tyrannical regimes...You know, like Sudan and Myanmar, and North Korea, and others. But you know what?...THere's no oil there.

C'mon Bully you can't have it both ways. Even the suggestion of "freeing other nations" would send you guys over a cliff. Look how well your handling Iraq. It has been less then 2 years, and you guys already want us to pull out.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
If you think this is a righteous war, then your education and reasoning skills are in serious need of improvement.

Coming from you this is funny. You wouldnt know Righteous if God Himself walked by you.

 

[Avatar4321]

Does it matter if the WMDs are left over from older stockpiles? The fact is Saddam had WMDs. We have found some of the weapons that werent accounted for to the UN Inspectors. Your arguments that Bush was lying have fallen upon the wayside.

As for liberating other nations. we should. But that doesnt mean we should do it faster than we are capable. We have our hands full in Iraq and Aghanistan at the moment. They are a good start. it seems Bully seems to think the fact that we liberated Iraq from Saddam and his sons, men who killed their own people, raped and tortured prisoners. Who sponsored mass graves, attacked their neighbors, and wanted to develop WMDs to kill more people is unrighteous. Apparently we are only there for the oil, which we havent taken yet.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by JIHADTHIS
C'mon Bully you can't have it both ways. Even the suggestion of "freeing other nations" would send you guys over a cliff. Look how well your handling Iraq. It has been less then 2 years, and you guys already want us to pull out.

Nobody's "handling" or, more appropriately, mishandling Iraq but Dubbyuh and his merry band. If America is going to be consistent in it's policies, then it needs to take action in these other nations to bring freedom and democracy to them.

But Iraq was never about freedom and democracy, was it?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Coming from you this is funny. You wouldnt know Righteous if God Himself walked by you.

Since I don't believe in God, it's a moot point.

 

[4USA]

Iraq was about removing a malignant despot who violated the terms of the first Gulf War ceasefire and U.N. resolutions repeatedly, continued to pose a threat to his neighbors, continued to commit genocide against his own people, continued to harbor ambitions and capabilities of developing WMD to pass off to his terrorist friends and continued providing sanctuary to terrorists like Zarqwa and maintaining numerous contacts with al Qaeda.

If we create a Western style democracy in Iraq, so much the better but I'll take a benign and relatively stable regime rather than a letal outlaw regime that we had.

 

[The Worried One]

There were no links between Saddam and Al Quaeda

 

[4USA]

You are totally wrong. I'll repeat here the incontrovertible facts that I posted on antoher thread. You obviously have not been worried about the real threats as President Bush was -

Saddam Hussein's regime had numerous contacts with al Qaeda and like minded terrorist groups. Their hatred of the United States was their common motive.

- Bin Laden himself visted Baghdad in 1998 and met with Tariq Aziz to set up training camps in Iraq.

- For two years prior to 9/11, Iraqi intelligence officers visited Afghanistan regularly to meet with bin Laden's chief lieutenant Ayman Al Zawahiri.

- According to an Iraqi intelligence memo addressed to Saddam Hussein dated July 1, 2001, Mohammad Atta - the 9/11 ringleader - had been in Baghdad to receive training from Abu Nidal, the Palestinian terrorist who had ben given sanctuary in Iraq but later "killed himself".

- Zarqawi - the thug who most likely beheaded Berk among other crimes - fled from Afghanistan to Iraq shortly after our toppling of the Taliban regime and got medical treatment in Baghdad courtesy of Sadam Hussein. Zarqawi then went on to set up training camps in Northern Iraq and is still wreaking havoc. The point is that he resided in Iraq before we removed Saddam Hussein, not as a result of our actions.

- Saddam's son Udai wrote in his newspaper Babil ten days after 9/11 and shortly before the anthrax attacks in the U.S. about the ease of using germ warfare. A little over a year later Udai published a "List of Honor" of Iraqi heros, which included the name of an Iraqi inteligence officer who was based in Pakistan and "responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama bin Laden group." That edition of Babil also included photos of Sadam and bin Laden.

- An Iraqi national Shakir, who got his job with Malaysian Airlines with the help of the Iraqi embassy in Malaysia, happened to be the individual selected to accompany two of the 9/11 highjackers to a fateful al Qaeda planning meeting in Malaysia held in 2000 where the Cole bombing was planned among other terrorist projects in the planning stages.


And the list goes on. Common motive was hatred of the United States and anything that smacked of democracy ("The enemy of my enmeny is my friend"). Anyone who seriously doubts the extensive dealings between the Saddam Hussein regime and al Qaeda & allied Islamic terrorist groups are also probably members of the Flat Earth Society.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by The Worried One
There were no links between Saddam and Al Quaeda

If you repeat a lie enough times, people will begin to believe it. I take it that is your method of being right.... just keep repeating the lie and hope others will believe you?

 

[Gop guy]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Since I don't believe in God, it's a moot point.

Hmmmmmm, you do know that THIS NATION WS FOUNDED BY PEOPLE WHO HAD A FIRM BELIEF IN JESUS CHRIST AND FULLY INTENDED TO KEEP HIM IN OUR GOVERNMENT, right?

 

[dilloduck]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Then America needs to free other nations from their tyrannical regimes...You know, like Sudan and Myanmar, and North Korea, and others. But you know what?...THere's no oil there.

As to your other criticism...I love America but I find it's current crop of "leaders" to be corrupt and incompetent beyond belief. Do not confuse loathing for this administration with loathing of America. I took an oath, the same oath that Dubbyuh and his neocon cronies took, to support and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. Something which Dubbyuh and his merry band seem to have chucked out the window with the bathwater.

"Then America needs to free other nations from their tyrannical regimes...You know, like Sudan and Myanmar, and North Korea, and others. But you know what?...THere's no oil there."

Good idea ! May take at least 4 more years of commitment to defending our country to do it but at least the current "merry men" are not trying to appease or pretend that we are in no danger.

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Nobody's "handling" or, more appropriately, mishandling Iraq but Dubbyuh and his merry band. If America is going to be consistent in it's policies, then it needs to take action in these other nations to bring freedom and democracy to them.

But Iraq was never about freedom and democracy, was it?

Just about every thread you start is more anti bush, anti war propoganda. You've got a picture of him with 666 on his forehead. Need I say more? Your hatred of him borders on irrational.

The fact still remains, If we started a military action in the Sudan or any other place you mentioned right now, the major media in this country and your fellow "anti-war" and "anybody but bush" crowd would go absolutley ballistic.

 

[freeandfun1]

No need for war in Sudan. Read this and get educated Bully.....

Sudan removed from US list of terror states, Libya still on

US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said on Tuesday evening that Sudan remained on the department's list of state sponsors of terrorism, despite its removal from the second terrorism list, designed for countries which are "noncooperative" on terrorism.

The situation is not perfect, but the Sudanese are cooperating enough that we don't need to go to war. We only have to go to war where there is NO cooperation.

DOH!

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
.......

Desperately grasping at any straw to breathe life back into the decaying corpse of Administration justifications for war with Iraq, behold...A single decaying sarin shell. A shell which, most likely, was a dud scavanged from the battlefield of Iraq's war with Iran. Not exactly the compelling evidence Dubbyuh was hoping for. [/B]

When you quote an authority on a subject as basis for fact, you open up that source for argument. You cannot ask anyone to to blindly accept these unproven opinions unchallenged, knowing the source has both contradicted his prior statements and demonstrates motive for distorting the truth.


One problem for Ritter's credibility is that his letter of resignation in 1998 said: "The sad truth is that Iraq today is not disarmed anywhere near the level required." A second is that the film was 80per cent funded by a wealthy Iraqi-America


CREDIBILITY

Ritter has many detractors for a reason: He lies. What he says today bears little resemblance to--indeed, it directly contradicts--what he said four years ago, when he returned from Iraq. "Once effective inspection regimes have been terminated," he warned in Senate testimony on September 3, 1998, "Iraq will be able to reconstitute the entirety of its former nuclear, chemical, and ballistic missile delivery system
capabilities within a period of six months."

And four months later, writing in the New Republic, Ritter was more specific. "Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production."

CIA Director George Tenet agrees with the Scott Ritter of 1998, not Scott Ritter, 2002. Tenet recently told the Senate Armed Service Committee that he believes Iraq "maintains an active and capable [bioweapons] program."

Ritter's disavowal of his previous analysis is strange enough. What's even more bizarre is just how far he will go to make his point. Last October, Ritter argued in the Los Angeles Times that "Iraq today presents a threat to no one." He makes the same argument today--on television and radio, in magazines and newspapers, and in speeches. Anywhere he can find an audience, he says what he said on the Fox News Channel last week: "Iraq is not a threat."

He says this despite growing evidence to the contrary. Saddam warns in most of his speeches that the Gulf War isn't over. "The mother of all Battles continues to this day," he declared on January 7. A statement issued by Saddam's Baath party on April 8 is more direct, urging the "striking at U.S. interests in the Arab homeland and the interests of the Zionist entity that have seeped into more than one place in the Arab homeland." The statement aired on state-run (read: Saddam-controlled) Iraqi television.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/249vnlte.asp


-------------

MOTIVE

https://registration.ft.com/registr...ry&c=StoryFT&cid=1079420293548&resource=ftarc

A Detroit-based businessman of Iraqi origin who financed a film by Scott Ritter, the former chief United Nations weapons inspector, has admitted for the first time being awarded oil allocations during the UN oil-for-food programme.

Shakir Khafaji, who had close contacts with Saddam Hussein’s regime, made $400,000 available for Mr Ritter to make In Shifting Sands, a film in which the ex-inspector claimed Iraq had been “defanged” after a decade of UN weapons inspections.

The disclosure is likely to raise further questions about the operation of the oil-for-food programme, which is already the subject of Congressional investigations and a separate high-level UN inquiry.

Congressional critics claim the Iraqi government manipulated the UN scheme in order to enrich members of the regime and buy influence abroad.

Mr Khafaji financed Mr Ritter’s film in the same period as he received “allocations” for Iraqi oil, handed out by Baghdad on a discretionary basis as part of the UN oil-for-food programme between 1995 and 2002.

Recipients of the allocations were able to sell the oil to international traders for between 10 cents and 30 cents per barrel. A 1m-barrel allocation could net as much as $300,000 in profit.

The scheme was set up in such a way that beneficiaries’ names were not recorded by the UN, and allowed them to claim they received no money from the Iraqi government.

I rest my case.